Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Has Napolitano gotten through to Gibson? The latter admits warrantless spying "might not be strictly legal"

Reported by Chrish - August 19, 2006 -

John Gibson flipped, if not totally flopped, in his "My Word" segment posted 8/18/06. Regarding the ruling by U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit that the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping is un-Constitutional, Gibson says it's "Not Strictly Legal, But Strictly Necessary." Maybe Judge Andrew Napolitano's insistence that the administration must get warrants, either before or after the fact, has finally sunk in.

He (Gibson) makes a

"Prediction: Somewhere along the line some justice in our appellate system will note that the Constitution is not a suicide pact and will agree with President Bush that this spying-on-terrorists operation is not only legally allowed, but is an absolute duty of our president, whoever he or she happens to be."

Unfortunately he's probably right. The courts have been so thoroughly loaded that all roads eventually lead to a right-wing yes-(wo)man who will legitimize the behavior.

After invoking a Washington Post editorial that he says appears to agree with his conclusion (Note: that this case will go further in the courts - the Post is unimpressed with the depth of the Judge's opinion), Gibson continues:

"I agree that the program might not be strictly legal, though I think it is strictly necessary. Perhaps Congress should amend the law to make it entirely legal. But whether we need it or not is beyond question.

Last week we were treated to the sight of two separate arrests of young Arab men running around the country buying untraceable phones. They are the terrorist phone of choice, and under present law our spies evidently cannot legally listen to conversations on these phones.

In other words, the civil libertarians say the terrorists are constitutionally allowed to conspire to kill us. That cannot be right.

President Bush is doing the right thing listening to these conversations. The Congress is not doing the right thing by ignoring the need to make eavesdropping on these phones legal. And the courts are doing the wrong thing telling the president to stop. "

This is classic FOX, repeating a lie that serves their agenda, even though it is provably incorrect. As we know, FOX also encourages its viewers to not trust any other media outlet - largely because much of the rest of the media (outside right-wing radio) does the contradictory reporting. From a Quinnipiac Poll:

By a 76 - 19 percent margin, American voters say the government should continue monitoring phone calls or e-mail between suspected terrorists in other countries and people in the U.S., according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today. But voters say 55 - 42 percent that the government should get court orders for this surveillance.

Everyone wants terrorists caught, violence prevented, and the US to surveil the former to accomplish the latter. The patriotic majority, though, wants the administration to adhere to existing laws that require warrants to protect citizens from un-Constitutional invasions of privacy. Is it too much to ask, for our elected government to operate within our laws? The folks at FOX seem to think so.